# Leroy S. Robinson, Jr. v. Robert A. McDonald

> United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · July 14, 2016 · 28 Vet. App. 178

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9835333

## Case

- **Full name:** Leroy S. ROBINSON, Jr., Appellant, v. Robert A. McDONALD, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Appellee
- **Court:** United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
- **Decided:** July 14, 2016
- **Citations:** 28 Vet. App. 178; 2016 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 1061; 2016 WL 3752395
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Lance
- **Judges:** Lance, Schoelen, Pietsch
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9835333

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that the Secretary failed to demonstrate that the Court was legally compelled to deviate from its usual and straightforward application of Rule 10(d) as requiring access to the original paper source documents

## Opinion text

LANCE, Judge,
concurring:
I fully join the Court’s order. I write separately only to note that, as the Secretary did not argue in this case that VA’s digitization process is entitled to the presumption of regularity, the Court was not required to address that issue. See Miley v. Principi, 366 F.3d 1343, 1347 (Fed.Cir.2004) (“The presumption of regularity provides that, in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, the court will presume that public officers have properly discharged their duties.”). The Secretary is not foreclosed from attempting to invoke that presumption in a future case. In light of the grave concerns identified in the Court’s order, however, he may find it difficult to demonstrate that the presumption attaches. See U.S. v. Roses Inc., 706 *193 F.2d 1563 (Fed.Cir.1983) (“It is really a presumption that what appears regular is regular ... [and] does not help to sustain an action that on its face appears irregular.... If it appears irregular, it is irregular.”).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9835333. Public record. Not legal advice.